Nightcrawler

Neon LA at night vs. a phenomenal Jake Gyllenhaal, who could convince a corpse that he can play almost any kind of character and emotional creation with utter brilliancy. The pacing is slower in both the plot and the formation of the protagonist's persona. Gradually, however, it gains steam and the escalating finale boldly ranks among the most thrilling moments of the year, and the whole thing is utterly unpredictable. (11/09/2015)

It's like an episode of GTA, from which someone removed the humor and most of the perspective. Unfortunately, Jake put on his "lose weight and get an award (consolation)" costume in a full retard style and the result is a perverted Forrest Gump character. It would have been possible to sit through if Dan Gilroy had not sought to show a perversely serious image of media hyenism. A few humorous moments make it better, but it's hard to balance a number of places where Gyllenhaal adds gas deep under the floor, resulting in a grin instead of freezing. I also have a problem with the structure. The first 2/3 is largely based on trying to engulf the viewer with the neon darkness of LA, but the combination of characters beyond the edge of believability and repetitive situations is not hypnotic, but instead rather annoying. Shock and derailment somehow don't get out through the photogenically overexposed night sets. The last third gets going thanks to the plot, but I rather inadvertently found myself watching Nightcrawler with a similarly shallow interest as reality cop shows (I don't care what happens to who, just that it's simply happening), while Gilroy's material is far cooler, lots of angles, gaps, music and so on... if this film is supposed to be a seductively distorted picture, it really failed. Because in the end it seduces the viewer into dull staring rather than a deep critical reflection on the media snuff. The sexual arousal of Jake and his lady friend at the end is perhaps the falsest moment of Nightcrawler, who stalks with commitment, but he misses the essence of the composition. Hardworking? For sure. Enchanting? No chance. (01/31/2015)

Nightcrawler was exactly what I was expecting it to be, which is basically the only complaint I can have. It was missing at least one moment of bigger surprise or shock. Basically, I thought that Gyllenhaal’s self-confident sociopath (all the good things that’ve been said about his performance are true) would go a little further in his quest for career advancement. It’s a critique of an awful era and the lack of morals, where only viewership numbers have value and ethics are pushed aside. “I will never want from you anything that I wouldn’t do myself.” Impressive, dark, captivating, but I think Lumet’s Network cuts deeper. 9/10 (12/20/2014)

According to a certain scientist, unsuccessful psychopaths fill prisons, while successful ones become bosses of multinational companies, industrial conglomerates, and respectable institutions. Lou is somewhere between these worlds. Without a formal education, but with high determination and an absolute absence of moral restraints and emotions. In the beginning, he is introduced as an absolute loser, but soon seizes an opportunity and starts his own business in the sale of videos, which journalists with ethical restraints cannot stomach. I cannot help but compare it to Fincher's successful drama Gone Girl, which, despite the director's undeniable craftsmanship, felt somewhat artificial to me, especially from an area where the topic has already been extensively explored in the past. I didn't believe in the story in Gone Girl, while Nightcrawler has an unpleasantly realistic undercurrent, and I never doubted for a moment that people like Lou are among us, waiting for their chance. Jake Gyllenhaal is a reliable actor and delivers exactly what his character requires. The direction is brisk and the camera works wonders. I did not regret my visit to the movie theater in the slightest. Perhaps only the script could have been a bit more restrained, as it is noticeable that Dan Gilroy wanted to depict his anti-hero in the most repulsive light possible, and the tools he uses for that purpose are somewhat direct. On the other hand, similar films often tend to partially sympathize with such a character, which fortunately does not apply in this case. Overall impression: 90%. (02/01/2015)

An intimate thriller whose greatest asset is the perfect performance of the lead actor – we haven't had such an unreadable, dark character going on his own without firearms for a long time, and together with the dark atmosphere of nighttime, crime-ridden L.A., especially in the end, it brings the emotional experience of the story to the level of the best we could see in 2014. In the final analysis, the film feels more like a small intro into the sick soul of an obsessive careerist, and doesn't make much of an effort to link his immoral actions with the commentary on criminal justice (the ending almost feels like an ode to investigative "snooping"), but that doesn't detract from its quality. 80% (07/09/2015)